Funny Thing—ACLU Didn’t Say Its Legalize-Marijuana Poster Boy Is Convicted Gang-Banger

Alexander Hart, VDARE, September 16, 2013

With the Obama administration’s decision to allow states to legalize drugs,  Eric Holder’s efforts to avoid minimum sentences for non-violent drug offenders and New York’s stop and frisk law in the hot seat, the persistent claims that the war on drugs targets minorities have increased. In June, the ACLU published a study entitled The War on Marijuana in Black and White. [ June,  2013 PDF] Everyone from the New York Times [Blacks Are Singled Out for Marijuana Arrests, Federal Data Suggests, By Ian Urbina, June 3, 2013] to Rand Paul regurgitated its findings. Virtually no-one criticized it. So I will.

According to the study, marijuana arrests have increased over the last decade and now make up 52% of all drug arrests. Some 46% of all arrests are for simple possession. Moreover, the study found that

…a Black person is 3.73 times more likely to be arrested for marijuana possession than a white person, even though Blacks and whites use marijuana at similar rates.

The ACLU study relied on the Department of Health and Human Service’s National Household Survey on Drug Abuse and Health, which found that 14% of blacks admitted to using marijuana, while only 11.6% of whites did.  I will explain why these numbers are unreliable in future VDARE.com article. But, for now, I want to focus on the minority drug offenders whom the ACLU chose to “profile” (with no apparent pun intended) as victims of the “racist” war on marijuana in their report.

I expected the ACLU to find some isolated case of a grandmother with glaucoma who had 1.1 ounces of marijuana and was charged with a felony and spent years in prison. However, almost all of the ACLU’s offenders spent, at most, a couple nights in jail while awaiting a judge. The most serious consequence for their arrests were inconveniences: modest fines, probation, suspended driver’s licenses, a temporary suspension of student aid unless the student took a drug education program.

All the offenders admitted they were guilty of the crime and none of them purported that they had any intention to abstain in the future.

But one of the subjects faced rather more consequences. According to the ACLU:

The first time DeMarcus Sanders was arrested for having marijuana, it cost him his job, his driver’s license, the start of a college degree, a month in jail, and thousands of dollars. A police officer pulled Mr. Sanders over for playing his music too loud. “My music was up,” he said. “So I didn’t argue with him.” After the police officer ran Mr. Sanders’ license, he said he smelled marijuana, and insisted on searching the car. He found a single marijuana seed on the floor, and arrested Mr. Sanders. Mr. Sanders pled guilty and was sentenced to 30 days in jail. While in jail, he was let go from his janitorial job and lost credit for the college classes he had been taking. Even though it has been a few years since he was arrested, Mr. Sanders still owes the state $2,346 for room and board at the jail, and for fines, court costs, and other fees. “They always send you threats like ‘You’ll get more jail time if you don’t hurry up and pay this off,’” he said.

But these consequences did not deter Mr. Sanders from smoking marijuana. The profile continues:

Mr. Sanders feels like being an African-American in Waterloo [Iowa] makes him a target for the police. Mr. Sanders was arrested for marijuana possession again last July.

All that for one seed?

Well…not exactly. Looking into the case, I found that prior to Sanders’ arrest for marijuana, he had shot a rival gang member. According to the Waterloo-Cedar Falls-Courier,

After the clash ended, the rival group left and the weapons of choice quickly escalated. That’s when Teondis Lemar Morehead drove back to Riehl Street with Curtis Junior Williams and Demarcus Darnell Sanders in his vehicle, Dalrymple said. He said Sanders and Williams opened fire—Williams hung out a window and fired over the roof of the vehicle—striking Rolandus Alexander, 18, in the leg.”

Man imprisoned in shooting, By Jeff Reinitz, July 21, 2006

Prosecutors described the clash as a “gangland shooting.” Sanders pled guilty to “intimidation with a weapon, willful injury causing bodily injury and going armed.”

Waterloo is a small city, and the police may have been aware of Sanders’ past with gang violence. Perhaps this is why they decided to search him after he committed minor offenses—not merely because he was an “African-American in Waterloo.”

According to public prison records, Sanders spent less than 2 years in jail for the shooting. He was released in 2008, and remained on parole through 2010.

In this respect, sentencing him to 30 days for drug use was actually more lenient than revoking parole and sending him back to jail. I suspect that much of the $2,346 for room and board for the jail is actually related to Sanders’ time spent for the shooting.

The ACLU authors are obviously aware of Sanders’ criminal history. They always note if the subject of other profiles had clean legal records prior to their marijuana arrest. But in this case, they cunningly describe the episode as “The first time DeMarcus Sanders was arrested for having marijuana.” [emphasis added]

Note, by the way, that Mr. Sanders appears as an “African-American in Waterloo”  when he’s “singled out” for  marijuana enforcement, but when he actually shoots someone, he appears in the local paper as “Man imprisoned.”

With this context to DeMarcus Sanders’ tale, the people profiled in the ACLU’s report are actually indicative of the true state of marijuana laws: almost no one spends any jail time for simple possession unless they also have a violent criminal record.

The ACLU’s study notes that “an estimated 1% [the actual number: 0.7%] of the prison population serving time solely on a marijuana charge.”

But according to the famed liberal criminologist Mark Kleiman, even the 0.7% figure is misleading because

Jacqueline Cohen of Carnegie Mellon University has shown that prisoners whose conviction charge was drug possession actually had more serious histories of violence than those convicted of violent crime; it takes an extraordinary criminal history to lead a judge to sentence someone to prison time for just possessing drugs, especially for just possessing modest quantities of marijuana. [Marijuana Legalization: What Everyone Needs to Know, p. 50]

Similarly, reviewing Bureau of Justice statistics, an organization called “ Smart Approaches to Marijuana,” whose board members include Patrick Kennedy and David Frum calculated in Marijuana and Who’s in Prison that only 0.1% the prison population is incarcerated for possession of marijuana without prior offenses.

Whatever the pros and cons of marijuana prohibition may be, the consequences it imposes on recreational users who are otherwise law-abiding citizens are virtually non-existent.

As I said, I will explain in a future VDARE.com column why the drug laws are not being applied unequally. But even if they were, marijuana legalization would have no effect on the disparate crime and corresponding arrest rates between blacks and whites.

Topics: , ,

Share This

We welcome comments that add information or perspective, and we encourage polite debate. If you log in with a social media account, your comment should appear immediately. If you prefer to remain anonymous, you may comment as a guest, using a name and an e-mail address of convenience. Your comment will be moderated.
  • Even in the 0.1% of the prison population in prison for marijuana possession without prior offenses, I bet there are more extenuating circumstances, most likely a plea deal.

    Point is, virtually nobody goes to prison for possessing weed.

    • Prosecutor to black defendant: “You plead guilty for the weed, agree to do a two year sentence, and we drop the felony weapons charge.”

    • dukem1

      How is it such a problem for these dudes? Why does it never occur to them to leave theirnstash at home? If you;ve got some good weed, tell your pals to come over to your place…Don’t decide to speed over there in your car with the busted tailight to get baked!!!
      Has it never occured to any of these folks that if you don’t have any weed on you, you cannot be arrested for

      • Non Humans

        Nonhumans have no future-time orientation. Thus have the inability to think ahead. Hence the 100% predictable “Ah Din Do Nuffins… Maaaaing!”

  • CoweringCoward

    The differences in white vs black prosecution for drugs probably has a lot to do with whites that do choose to use drugs also having jobs and not robbing to get them.

  • Spartacus

    “Note, by the way, that Mr. Sanders appears as an “African-American in
    Waterloo” when he’s “singled out” for marijuana enforcement, but when
    he actually shoots someone, he appears in the local paper as “Man imprisoned.”

    ———————————————————————————————————————

    • dave

      perfect resemblance.

      • Spartacus

        They all look the same anyway…

        • dave

          true, they lack diversity when it comes to hair/eyes. its black on black. we have different color/style hair and eyes. they have afro’s unless they put in chemicals to straighten it.

          • Thor Bonham

            Agreed , black males and females also look the same ..

            If a female black cuts it’s fro short, then you actually have to look two or three time to tell the difference, if you can at all..
            Course, that’s if the female doesn’t add hair extensions (as most do)

            facial features are an exact match..

          • CoweringCoward

            I have discovered the best way to sex blacks. One need only observe it’s paws vs it’s groin region, as a paw on the groin usually indicates you are dealing with a male of the species (emphasis on USUALLY).

        • CoweringCoward

          After one of the times I was robbed I had to go to a lineup, good god, I couldn’t tell one iota of difference across the lot. This was my meat cleaver over the head robbery(pistol was on my buddy driving). Blacks ever pull in front of you at an angle, RAM THEM! I still remember telling my bud DUDE, they are jacking us… He hesitated and they were upon us!

          Around blacks, NEVER RELAX!

    • Formerly_Known_as_Whiteplight

      I must commend you for your artwork.

      • Spartacus

        Tis not mine, I’m afraid. I got it from the web.

  • Puggg

    If there’s a gap between arrests for possession-use of weed between blacks and whites, it may well be because white potheads tend to be smart enough not to advertise and not to get caught.

    • Jenkem Huffington

      And BLACKS are more likely to be engaged in some other criminal behavior or just generally being obnoxious and attracting attention. White folks I know who are stoners are pretty careful about not being conspicuous, and generally drive cars that belong to them, are registered, have driver’s licences, don’t have warrants, etc. etc.
      Again, far more to the story than “they beez pickin’ on me because I is black, gnomesain”

    • CoweringCoward

      Or not to have robbed to buy it.

    • 48224

      Exactly. Having lived in Detroit for 30 years I have see blacks smoking, selling talking about weed in the open, on the street. I once had a black dude try to sell me weed outside a hospital. I lied and told him I was a cop and to knock it off…..he laughed at me. That’s a true story.
      I think stupid criminals tend to get caught more than smart ones. Therefore, blacks with the documented lowest IQ of any race should be getting caught more….just a thought.

  • bubo

    Liberal whites and rabble rousing blacks actually believe that blacks are somehow treated more harshly than whites in the justice system when all the evidence points to the opposite.
    Just look at the blog “Charleston thug life” to see for yourself the rampant criminality that blacks commit but are rarely punished for. There is so much black criminality that it has basically broken the courts. Shootings are plead down to assault. Assault reclassified as harassment. Little to no actual jail time for most felonies.

    The ACLU is completely disingenuous. You are either or a liar or soft in the head to believe people are imprisoned for personal use of marijuana.

  • Kit Ingoldby

    Sad fact, but wherever you get blacks you get crime.

    That is the reason for disproportionate imprisonment rates, not ‘racism’ or ‘profiling’.

  • Greg Thomas

    I think we already knew!

    • Formerly_Known_as_Whiteplight

      The libs and government spies perusing this site need to hear it once in a while, too. There’s always a chance some white is on the fence and only needs some basics repeated.

  • dukem1

    Why don’t these morons just leave their stash ay home? Invite their pals over, instead of speeding over to their place in your lousy beater car with the burned out taillight?
    They deserve to be in trouble, not for being potheads, but just for being so stupid!!!

    • sbuffalonative

      You answered yourself in the first sentence.

      I talk to the police at community meeting. They tell me they pick up the same people in the same places for the same reasons. It never seems to occur to these people to, if not stop what they’re doing, at least modify their behavior.

  • Non Humans

    “Whatever the pros and cons of marijuana prohibition may be, the consequences it imposes on recreational users who are otherwise law-abiding citizens are virtually non-existent.”
    .
    I have to respectfully disagree on this point. In nearly all cases, law-abiding recreational marijuana users suffer the consequence of loss of employment. I know that a job/career isnt important to a nonhuman, but for those of us who can claim the title of human, the loss of a good job for enjoying a little marijuana is hardly what I would classify as a non-existent consequence.

    • Thor Bonham

      Dude, leave the “non-human” talk to places like chimpout, this isn’t that kind of forum ..
      Mr. Jared Taylor deserves more respect than that …
      He works hard for AmRen to be successful and to give us information on a superior level to that of places like chimpout ,niggermania or Irateirishman , to name a few..
      You can write that stuff over there ..

      • MystiKasT

        Blacks are much less evolved than other races— would that not classify them as ‘nonhuman’?

        • Andy

          You could break the human race into several subspecies, but not species. “Human”, however, can cover populations as genetically distinct from us as Neanderthals. So scientifically speaking, “non-human” is not an accurate descriptor for blacks. Calling them non-humans is an emotional appeal, and one that plays on our baser instincts. It will lower the quality of our thoughts and motives, and turn off people who might otherwise look into these issues long enough to see the truth.

          • Formerly_Known_as_Whiteplight

            As long as they can successfully mate with other humans they get included, tragic as that seems to us.

            However, there is some reason to hope. I’ve been waiting for a place to report this, and this seems like a good place; in the 2007 book, “Before the Dawn,” geneticists use the most recent genetic studies to trace the evolution of modern humans, where they went and where they developed into who. In the books concluding chapters is a discussion of what might occur in the future. Here is what one paragraph, that is to our point of concern;

            “One way in which future human evolution will differ from that of the past is that in larger populations the effect of genetic drift is much diminished. The larger the population, the longer it takes for one version of a gene to supplant all the alternative ersions. Since drift is a principal mechanism for reducing the diversity that is constantly introduced by mutation, it follows that human genomes will become more diverse as neutral mutations accumulate. Too much diversity, according to theoretical calculations could eventually make people infertile unless
            they mated only with people whose genomes are similar to their own. This would make it impossible for all humans to interbreed, as is the case at the present, and confine people to seeking partners within genetically similar groups. Such an outcome would be another step in fragmenting the human population into different species.”

            They discuss further that this and other problems like mutations that cause diseases, etc., can be human controlled technologically and that this might be desirable for a number of reasons, including that one species might end up being superior to another and therefore the master of the other(s). They also argue for letting natural evolution do its work. So the struggle between what we might call the “Libertarian” and the “Marxist” finds its way into the argument and control of the future.
            The hopeful thing is that such technology would be hugely expensive and not likely to be effectively deployed in a world already running down (economics follow genetics on the evolutionary chart).

            For me, it seems a crime to intervene with evolution in the laboratory and as I describe above, while the conceit might be there, the cost and actuality of it makes it doubtful. The manipulation of genes at that level is a Mary Shelly nightmare. If over mixing and then the generalizing of the human population ends up with nature reducing the population through
            rendering these groups unable to mate while purer genetic groups separate into species, I see this as nature’s way, and the less cataclysmic one I have learned of – to allow for higher life forms to continue on earth at all. Whites, blacks, etc, that remained the purest would continue their races while the larger genetically neutered populations die off naturally. How long would this take? A long time, but it can be argued that time is shortened by the speed of the generalization of genetics through intermixing. So the more miscegenation that happens the sooner the event of species separation will occur. This also rather confirms that it was a natural, evolutionary process for the races to evolve and further that race is not merely a political condition.

            I have long felt that I understood that while interbreeding creates mutations that end up producing desirable results, (such as increased intelligence and some of the extremes of beauty we see in so many of the European examples (isolated for hundreds of years from eacth other and the outside world due to geography), the opposite, outbreeding, must eventually produce a product so generalized that it could not evolve. This book and this particular passage explains why and what is likely to occur because of the now expanding and unnatural mixing of races on such a large and sudden scale.

      • Formerly_Known_as_Whiteplight

        I may be confusing the poster’s handle with your assumption that he is calling blacks non-humans. Otherwise, it seems like a relevant criticism to me. The huge amount of pot use in America has led to the increase is “tolerance” for anything, and is largely responsible for the listlessness in white society or the misdirection of energy due to the long term dilution of issues, even for people that never partook or think they aren’t affected. Dope culture has become mainstream for a long time now and it carries a Marxist stamp on it.

        • Thor Bonham

          You don’t have to confuse anything, just read his posts, never mind his handle .. In every post he refers to blacks as non-humans ..
          All I was saying is, how will anyone take what we stand for seriously if we go around calling blacks non -humans or any other names ?? As I’ve said you can call them that on other sites .
          Other people read these posts, not just whites ..
          We look like fools if we don’t say anything ..

          I stick to original post .. I believe what I say ..

          • Formerly_Known_as_Whiteplight

            I’m actually a long time poster here who has often taken issue with other posters that self-indulge in non-productive, emotional and reactive posting. A part of every posting board seems to also serve as therapy for some. Now that we’re in the cyber age, people often do their therapy in public. However, in this the average race realist here is far less vicious than this or the typical stuff you read from those on the other side liberal posting boards, CNN for example, where I often post. As long as they can paste one of the operative words on you, easily drawn out, terms like “racist” as the leading one, then you are automatically not worthy of consideration, respect or life. That follow-up is often used. I even got a death threat a couple weeks ago. One may read such stuff all day long there.

            Be sure that you are not just setting yourself up as a cyber-cop, unless you are an actual moderator. Otherwise it’s pretentious. Be assured, such comments as “sub-human” doesn’t lose any real candidates for conversion to race realism. Further, if you review the details of recent famous crimes against whites, or if you spent a few days in a place like South Africa, you might yourself understand why some posters here use such terms.

          • Thor Bonham

            WOW ! Man, I’m a 3 year member of chimpout, I know all about blacks and what they do and how they act.. I’m very much aware of blacks and their attitudes.. I also know all the statistics … I don’t think you understand what I am saying, but that is ok, everyone can have their own opinion .. Whatever , anyone can write what they want, it didn’t get moderated out, so I guess it’s ok to the moderators here..
            Just ask yourself this question, will it do any good, to say what he is saying, to people that already know and feel the same way he does?
            What sense is there to fight for whites rights when the people we are trying to reach read a comment like that ?
            It does no good and they will just laugh at us..
            This site I always thought of as above all of the rest.. A site that we actually have a person ,[Mr Taylor] fighting for the right of whites, I never saw it as a bash bantu site ..

    • Formerly_Known_as_Whiteplight

      The other fact is that chronic pot use creates a number of undesirable mental disorders. This is not to even consider that the mental laziness it creates actually helps them become more liberal, less disciplined.

  • sbuffalonative

    However, almost all of the ACLU’s offenders spent, at most, a couple nights in jail while awaiting a judge. The most serious consequence for their arrests were inconveniences: modest fines, probation, suspended …

    Pot possession is a petty nuisance crime. The police don’t make a great effort to search out people with pot. Pot is usually found on them while being searched for another crime. The police, like most working stiffs, just want to punch in and punch out and return to their regular lives.

    The only time they start going after sellers and users is when crime increases in an area.

    I’m glad to see that VDARE has exposed the facts about pot arrests. Most people spend a night in jail or until they’re processed. First time offenders are given the lightest slap on the wrist and told, ‘don’t do it again’. But low IQ people can’t learn. They can’t understand they’ve been given a second chance and they can’t seem to understand they should modify their behavior (hanging out in the same areas with the same people at all hours of the day and night).

    • 1Forced_Registration

      It depends on the town. There is a lot of money in marijuana arrests, and the subsequent court ordered treatment, probation, and other compliance issues. Not really any more than with DUI arrests, but the proceeds are still substantial. Its not unusual for a “simple” marijuana arrest to end up costing the user $5,000 to $10,000 before its all over, with the city that originated the arrest pocking at least $2,500 of that in many cases. The police definitely prefer to go after minors as well due to the subsidies that are involved for marijuana arrests. (In Missouri they have a guaranteed funding source for the coerced treatment for minors. For adults they have to use the coercion of jail to try to force payment.)

      Then you have the jurisdictions that tack on jail fees, and that is an extra source of revenue (if people actually pay it).

  • John Ulfsson

    Freaking degenerates, I absolutely hate how young whites make this stuff their identity and by proxy make useless ‘people’ like Bob Marley their idols. Really? Alexander the Great, Frederick the Great, Napoleon, the founding fathers, and all of the great whites and history and you idolize some useless black Marxist-leaning druggie? Really?

  • Reverend Bacon

    This is a nice article with some good research behind it. Thanks for digging to verify what many of us had suspected.

    In general, liberals tend to know next to nothing about statistics, and even less about logic and analysis. They have used aggregate statistical data for decades to “prove” racism and sexism in wage disparities. Similar to your analysis, the real cause of the disparities are that two entirely different jobs are categorized as “the same” and deserving of the same benefits. Women are more likely to work for non-profits, for example, which tend to pay less. That is, an “Accounting manager” in a Fortune 50 company might pay far more than an “accounting manager” at, say, UNICEF. Blacks are more likely to work in government, which pays less; and they are also more likely to have inflated titles, due to affirmative action, but without the same responsibilities as their white counterparts at non-affirmative action companies.

    • Formerly_Known_as_Whiteplight

      Here’s why an equal pay legislation will never come into being; it’s blatantly unconstitutional. You can’t force private employees to pay everyone the same. Women and minorities already dominate the cushiest government jobs, but now, women especially expect the lawmakers to create for them what men have had to do for themselves all along and especially during the past 45 years; be smart, astute and a good negotiator. Women, like blacks and others have created a culture for themselves wherein they expect legislation to cover it for them.

      Another really fascinating angle of this is being illustrated very well by a woman who is a “Mens’ Rights” advocate on youtube. Her handle is “girlwriteswhat.” She has a video lecture she titles “Femapocalypse.” She explains how the economy will crash, even if everything else is compensated for because women cost any employer more than any man and with women now constituting more than half the employed people in the U.S., the equation points to an impossible to narrow, but ever widening national deficit. Now, don’t anyone jump onto this one until you go watch the video. The situation is undeniable.

      • I am convinced if comparable worth legislation was ever enacted, most employers would comply by paying men less, not by paying women more.

        • Formerly_Known_as_Whiteplight

          I have long believed this myself. We saw it happen in the 70s when women were forced into previously male dominated employment positions. Employment opened to women by paying them less and forced men to go solo more often. A side effect of this was the creation of women with similar expectations for government assistance as a welfare dependent becomes after years and generations of dependence. (But I’ve already said that, above). Another side effect was the beginning of the end for Unions. Going this further step would certainly have the same effect, which is why it might get some traction with the Republicans. But they will all have to step on the Constitution to do it.

  • JohnEngelman

    The urban black underclass is economically useless, parasitic, and dangerous. It is probably true that most poor ghetto blacks males are guilty of many crimes including murder that they were never arrested for. Any excuse for getting them off of the street, into prison, and keeping them there makes America safer for decent people.

    • CoweringCoward

      Very costly proposition. Repatriation is a lot more appealing, as Lincoln once said, and I paraphrase, “We need to return the blacks to their homeland, which they must so sorely miss”.

      • JohnEngelman

        Repatriation did not work when the black population was much smaller. It would not work now. Most blacks did not want to leave.

        Most blacks are not criminals. Most who are not would probably like to be rid of those who are. Blacks are more likely to be victims of black criminals than are whites.

        • Martel

          There is more black on white violence then black on black violence. The later is hardly ever “random”, and nearly always gang related.

        • NorthSea

          When I hear of repatriation, I have to wonder what country would take them. It’s a satisfying emotional nostrum, but I don’t see much realism in it.

          • JohnEngelman

            Looking forward to a white ethno state is the same sort of nostrum. Diversity is not America’s strength. It is a problem we have to manage.

        • CoweringCoward

          “Most who are not would probably like to be rid of those who are.”
          Hence the “no snitching” ethos right?

      • Formerly_Known_as_Whiteplight

        Prevention is the best, but least likely solution. (I mean prevention as to being born at all).

    • MBlanc46

      You could use that rationale to criminalize just about anything. I’d prefer to incarcerate blacks for actual crimes that they actually commit.

  • MystiKasT

    Your life can be ruined without going to prison. Legalize it already. It is much less harmful than alcohol and tobacco.

    • Formerly_Known_as_Whiteplight

      I just don’t agree with that. Not in the long run. Look at the number and conditions of societies and civilizations with a history of pot use and compare them to those that use alcohol and even nicotine. The pot societies are ignorant, economic failures. Additionally, marijuana has been consistently shown to produce a number of mental problems in chronic users. I think it is obvious that 40+ years of rampant use in America has produced a drug culture that allows sloppiness in every way until today, where it is so generalized that few people even notice it, similar to how the user thinks it doesn’t show when they’re stoned, in their work or physically in the moment. The truth is that it is so proliferate now that we can’t hope to police it. This doesn’t make it a less dangerous in the long run than alcohol or cigarettes, it’s just another historical fact in the epic of the fall of the West..

  • Formerly_Known_as_Whiteplight

    Okay, but history shows that countries that have traditionally consumed alcohol still continued to progress and expand while history also shows that countries/societies where people are well known for marijuana consumption are uniformly backward and relatively impoverished.

    There is a big difference in the way the two are metabolized. Alcohol is quickly processed while marijuana, (thc) accumulates and what we could term “hangover” affects, which includes neural cognitive dysfunctions continue, often up until the next partaking. This difference has real affects on a society. It sure has in America in the past 45 years. Further, I am convinced that pot creates a sort of thought habit that can be described as “free association” as a replacement for normal, rational logic. The widespread tendency for this to replace the hard work of critical thought allows more for emotional appeals. The left has known this and used it for decades if not longer. (Christian Conservatives have had their religion as their “opium”). This is why pot smokers tend to be liberals; the liberal mode is easier to take, less of a “hassle.” When they do think they have an issue worth getting upset about, it expresses itself more often as a psychosis in both words and behavior.